Conflict management

Questions to be answered:

Is the conflict viewed as something rather positive, negative or neutral?

Which of the main conflict management styles does the leader prefer?
How well does the leader adapt his conflict management style to the context?
What else did you notice?
Can you give examples of conflict situations relevant for your arguments?

MAKING CONFLICT MANAGEMENT A

STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE
Conflict has key effects on productivity, decision making, and retention and is about more than
just saving time. Most organizational conflicts involve disagreements over task-related matters, with
people bringing diverse perspectives, information, and expertise to bear on an issue. Too often, some key
input is suppressed or ignored, or the conflict leads to deadlock and inaction. But, when conflicts are
handled constructively, these diverse inputs are likely to be considered on their merits and incorporated
into better, more innovative decisions. Decision makers are likely to get accurate feedback on the results
of decisionsin time to take corrective action. These decision-making benefits can be important for any
organization on important, non-routine issues. They are especially vital for organizations that aspire to be
learning-organizations or to compete on the basis of rapid adaptation and innovation.
Poorly managed task-related conflicts can easily become personalgenerating resentment,
antagonism, and hostility. These emotional conflicts interfere with work relationships, create stress,
polarize teams, and are a major factor in absenteeism and voluntary turnover. When conflicts are managed
constructively, on the other hand, people are likely to feel that they are listened to and treated fairly,
which reduces personalization of conflict, absenteeism, turnover, and formal complaints.
There are five key elements of a strategy for making conflict management a core competency in
an organization:
1.
2.
3.
4.

developing conflict literacy,

measuring conflict styles,
building conflict management skills,
involving top management,
5. using conflict-focused team building and interventions.
1.DEVELOPING CONFLICT LITERACY

To manage conflict effectively, an organization needs to develop a common language that helps
people think effectively and communicate clearly about conflict and its management. An useful definition
of conflict is the condition in which peoples concerns appear to be incompatible.
When people find themselves in conflict, their behavior can be described in terms of where it
lies along two independent dimensionsassertiveness and cooperativeness. Assertiveness is the degree to
which you try to satisfy your own concerns, and cooperativeness is the degree to which you try to satisfy
the other persons concerns.
Competing is assertive and uncooperative. You try to satisfy your own concerns at the others
expenseto win.
Accommodating is unassertive and cooperativethe opposite of competing. You sacrifice your
own concerns to satisfy the other persons.
Compromising is partially assertive and partially cooperative. You look for an acceptable
settlement that only partially satisfies both your own and the other persons concerns.
Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative. You try to sidestep or postpone the conflict,satisfying
neither persons concerns.
Collaborating is assertive and cooperative. You try to problem-solve to find a solution that
completely satisfies both your concerns and the others.What differentiates collaborating from other
conflict-handling modes is that people are listening to others views, not just focusing on their own, and
are trying to incorporate them into sound decisions.
2.MEASURING CONFLICT STYLES
Measuring conflict style makes explicit peoples unconscious habits and assumptions about
conflict, so that choices can be re-examined and made more thoughtfully. Measurement also provides a
baseline against which to chart change and improvement. The most useful measures seem to be those that
reduce defensiveness by recognizing that each of the conflict-handling modes is appropriate for certain
kinds of conflict situations.
3.BUILDING CONFLICT MANAGEMENT SKILLS
Choosing the Right Conflict Mode
In negotiations over resources, collaborating is more likely than other modes to result in
integrative or win-win outcomes. In disagreements over decision making, collaborating is better at
combining diverse insights into more accurate understandings and more innovative solutions.
Collaborating also enhances communication and learning and builds trust.
In contrast, research shows that personality conflicts have strong negative consequences in
organizations and should be avoided. Conflicts become personalized when people focus their energy and
attention on what is wrong with each other rather than on substantive conflict issues.
Implementing a Mode Effectively
Concerns are the things people care about in a conflictwhat they are trying to satisfy. In
contrast, the positions people take are the solutions they recommend as a way of satisfying their concern.
Finding a collaborative solution requires identifying the concerns behind peoples positions.

Firm flexibility- clarifies what you need to be firm about. The idea is to be firm about
meeting your concerns, but also to signal flexibility about choosing a position.
Reducing the Costs of a Mode
Managers who are less skilled at conflict management often accept some collateral damage as
normal or inevitable. More adept managers find ways to minimize these costs. For example, managers
can learn how to compete when necessary without antagonizing people, how to avoid an issue without
being evasive, how to accommodate without looking weak, and so on.
4.INVOLVING TOP MANAGEMENT
Building Openness into the Culture
Each organizations culture has a built-in mind-set about conflict. As a result, different cultures
seem to favor different conflict modes. The prevailing mind-set in some organizations is that conflict is a
threat to relationships and team cohesiveness, so people should do what they can to accommodate others
views and needs. Some organizations view conflict mostly as a potential drain on time and energy, so
conflict issues should be avoided whenever possible. Other organizations see conflict as a challenge to
ones credibility and authority, so one needs to counter it stronglythat is, take a competitive stand and
protect ones position. Still other organizations see mutual concessions and compromise as the only
pragmatic way to settle conflicts.
Improving Strategic Decision Making
The effective teams frame the conflicts as collaborations to find the best solution for the
organization as a whole.
5.USING THE MODES IN TEAM BUI LDING AND INTERVENTION
When top management is actively involved in setting an example and people throughout the
organization have received training in the basics of constructive conflict management, teams will still
need help transitioning to the new behaviors.
Appreciating Different Styles
Each conflict style comes with an underlying set of values, and people with a given style tend to
see other styles as neglecting or opposing their values. Team members can benefit from learning that
teammates with all five conflict styles have positive values and are trying to make a positive contribution
to the team. Understanding the positive intentions and contributions of each style reduces resentments
over style differences and makes it easier for team members to listen to each other. They can then learn
from one anothers insights.
Reducing Excessive Behaviors
Each conflict style can help a team be more effective when used in appropriate situations. Each
style also comes with temptations that should be guarded against. These temptations involve behaviors
that are excessive in some way and create problems for the team. It is important to help team members
become aware of these temptations so that they can guard against them in their own behavior and give
feedback to teammates when they slip into these patterns.
Overcoming the Challenges of Team Style

A teams conflict style depends on the styles of its membersespecially those of its formal
leader and any other members who are particularly influential. Teams with different conflict styles tend to
operate with very different behaviors and have quite different atmospheres.
Even though each conflict style is an attempt to make a positive contribution to the team, these
styles often have unintended consequences at the team level.
With help from facilitators, it is important for teams to identify their natural style and how
strong their preference for that style is. They can accomplish this by measuring members styles and
looking for common patterns. Next, facilitators can help the teams recognize the predictable challenges
that will interfere with collaboration because of their team style. In accommodater teams, for example,
the challenges include difficulty in asserting ones needs, conformity, reluctance to debate or challenge
other members views, shading the truth so as not to hurt feelings, and trouble with taking an unpopular
stand. The facilitators can then help the teams decide on remedies to overcome these challenges. Leaders
in these accommodater teams can poll members about their needs to make sure they get aired. Leaders
can also establish norms of critical thinking and truth-telling on important issues. Structured debates or
devils advocates can help ensure that weak assumptions get challenged. The challenges and remedies
would be quite different for competitor teams, avoider teams, and compromiser teams. To become more
effective at conflict management, then, teams need to take different routes depending on their starting
points.